Human Rights

the question of human rights has received a great deal of attention. Today, violation of human rights is seriously taken note of by international bodies and by champions of democracy. It is in this backdrop that most countries have set up their own independent National Human Rights Commissions. Human rights are those rights which are fundamental for living and for normal human existence. They are based on the concept that every man and woman, irrespective of caste, creed, colour, race and nationality is born with certain fundamental rights such as, right to live, speech, freedom, justice, etc. These rights are, therefore, enshrined in the constitution of the countries. In order, that these basic rights are maintained and adhered to by the nations of the world, United Nations Organisation adopted a Charter of human rights soon after its formation. The Universal Declaration of Human rights which UN adopted on 10th Dec. 1948 enumerates some of these basic rights of man. These are rights to live, liberty and security of person, right to freedom of speech, judicial remedy, freedom of movement, right to take part in the governance of one’s country, etc. The second types of rights are economic and social rights. These are the right to work, right to live with dignity, right to rest and leisure, right to education, equal pay for equal work, right to equality, etc. The problem of human rights is that people and countries have a different understanding of the term and its protection. In some counties political and civil rights are not given or guaranteed to all its citizens. In some other countries, economic and social rights are not enforced, Therefore, the basic idea behind stressing human rights is that all governments should try to maintain these fundamental rights and see that all types of discrimination in this respect are rooted out. Nevertheless, many types of discrimination and violation of human rights are seen in different parts of the world. It is true that...

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

...history about how to deal with humanrights violations? Your answer should make reference to at least 3 historical case studies.
To fully understand what the question is asking we must first define what is meant by ‘HumanRights’ and what constitutes a violation of these rights. Once this essay has defined what a humanrights violation is it shall then go on to describe periods in history where there has been a clear breach of a peoples humanrights and describe what society has learned from these events.
Peter Baehr, An author and professor of HumanRights from the Netherlands defines humanrights as “internationally agreed values, standards or rules regulating the conduct of states towards their own citizens and towards non-citizens…Humanrights tell states what they may not do, but also what they are supposed to do.”(Baehr, 1999. P1). Humanrights as we know them came about at the end of World War two as a consequence of the reign of the National Socialists in Germany who killed more than six million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals and political opponents. It was the greatest scale of fundamental humanrights violations in modern times. The acts committed in this period of time helped permanently etch into the...

...﻿Terrorism and HumanRights
Total wordcount: 7921
COUNTER-TERRORISM & HUMANRIGHTS
The duty to comply with HumanRights while countering terrorism
Introduction
Since the end of the Second World War, and the Cold War, terrorism has been one of the main issues of the international community. Not only has terrorism been perceived as a threat to the peace and the security, but also, an aggression of the fundamental rights and to the democracy.
Following the 9/11 attacks, which have shaken the civilized world to its core foundations, the fight against terrorism became even more significant. The Security Council, in 2001, has adopted the Resolution 13731 (which is indicative of the importance of this issue). This resolution constitutes a general framework of the international campaign against terrorism, by defining all the measures that can actually be done to fight against it and by declaring the necessity to fight against terrorism by all “legal” mean. Therefore, the Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee has also been established2. De facto, with a general framework and an institutional framework, nothing could possibly prevent States in fighting terrorism under the aegis of the United Nations. However, if the Resolution claims to fight against terrorism, it does not define it, which is not surprising knowing that before the resolution,...

...HumanRights Paper
One of the most undeniable and challenging foreign policy debates of the last several years has concerned the future of democracy and its role in human-rights law. The idea of Western societies encouraging democratization of non-western societies is believed to be cultural imperialism, which abuses the power of states in the developing world. However for the purpose of this paper, I view the support of democratization by Western societies as a positive approach to achieving the core significance of the Universal Declaration of HumanRights that is supposedly recognized by all states.
The Universal Declaration of HumanRights was created on the notion of a common human race. It represents the first global expression of rights to which all human beings are naturally entitled. Of the fifty-eight countries that were members of the United Nations in 1948, forty-eight countries initially approved the document. Essentially all of the world’s states have approved it since then, which indicates that in any event its principle articles should be used by all states as an instrument in binding international law
in spite of the presence of treaty ratification or state of war. Considering the fact that most countries have agreed to abide by the Declaration of HumanRights, it can...

...To a large extent to which the creation of the United Nations and the fundamental rights expressed in The Universal Declaration of HumanRights, 1948 was driven by the atrocities that occurred during World War Two and a need to protect humanrights in the future. Although the UDHR was such a might establishment it has limited success, but continues to be an organisation that holds hope. HumanRights are the entitlements and freedoms to which all humans are empowered to, such as; the freedom of speech, information, life, belief, association and in law. However Adolf Hitler saw it necessary to remove basic liberties to achieve a nation of what he thought was a ‘master race’. His visionary goals were to abolish of all minority groups as he believed, such as the Jewish people. As ruthless as he was, Hitler did not allow any obstacles to prevent his idealistic development of Germany to become an overpowering nation. This meant that he would use inhumane methods. It was then decided that there was a need to strengthen and safeguard fundamental humanrights so that these atrocities would never happen again, thus the adoption of The Universal Declaration of HumanRights by the United Nations. Specifying that all humans are equal to one another, even though Hitler believed that there were various...

...﻿Jimmy Meyer
Moral Problem in a Contemporary Society
University of Minnesota
3.1.2015
War on Terrorism and Basic HumanRights
Part I
The essential moral fact about war is that the innocent are suitable targets of physical violence. The morality of the battlefield discriminates not between the innocent and the guilty, but between the combatant and the noncombatant. Combatants, however, cannot be equated with the morally guilty, since opposing combatants are likely to have equally legal entitlements to moral innocence. Each is licensed, legally and morally, to try to kill as many of the other side as possible. Each enjoys this license because each acts in self-defense against the other. The reciprocal burden of risk generates the space that permits injury to the morally innocent. Yet, every military force also has a persuasive ethical duty to abate the risk of injury to its own forces. Each endeavors to create an asymmetrical state of affairs in which the enemy suffers the risk of injury more while its own forces remain safe. The absurdity of riskless warfare arises when the chase of asymmetry undermines reciprocity. Without reciprocal imposition of risk, what is the moral underpinning for injuring the morally innocent? Humanrights belong to each and every member of humankind irrespective of sex, race, nationality, socio-economic group, political opinion, sexual orientation or any...

...﻿Jimmy Meyer
Moral Problem in a Contemporary Society
University of Minnesota
3.1.2015
War on Terrorism and Basic HumanRights
Part I
The essential moral fact about war is that the innocent are suitable targets of physical violence. The morality of the battlefield discriminates not between the innocent and the guilty, but between the combatant and the noncombatant. Combatants, however, cannot be equated with the morally guilty, since opposing combatants are likely to have equally legal entitlements to moral innocence. Each is licensed, legally and morally, to try to kill as many of the other side as possible. Each enjoys this license because each acts in self-defense against the other. The reciprocal burden of risk generates the space that permits injury to the morally innocent. Yet, every military force also has a persuasive ethical duty to abate the risk of injury to its own forces. Each endeavors to create an asymmetrical state of affairs in which the enemy suffers the risk of injury more while its own forces remain safe. The absurdity of riskless warfare arises when the chase of asymmetry undermines reciprocity. Without reciprocal imposition of risk, what is the moral underpinning for injuring the morally innocent? Humanrights belong to each and every member of humankind irrespective of sex, race, nationality, socio-economic group, political opinion, sexual orientation or any...

...Are humanrights innate and universal?
Living HumanRights
Post WWII on the 10 December 1948, the Universal Declaration of HumanRights (UDHR) was espoused by the General Assembly of the United Nations in order to agree on the notion that such atrocities that occurred throughout the Great War and the Second World War would not ever be reciprocated. The document that was drawn up in less than two years by the UN and Western states, and although ambitious it would guarantee a premise for life and living for every individual all over the world. The UDHR are founded on nobility, equality and reverence, and are said to be aimed at all cultures and religions within the West and East of the globe. However there is great discrepancy regarding the justification and practicality of humanrights all over the world due to political, economic and cultural differences and limitations. Universal means that ‘something’ affects, applies or is completed by everyone all over the world – there is no distinctive bias shown and equal policies are applied. Innate, in relation to humanrights, means that people are given natural rights purely based on the fact that he/she is human and alive. Therefore, are humanrights universal and innate or is the Universal Declaration of Human...

...slavery , sickness and other arbitrary executions. To prevent such atrocities in the future , there are legal responses and non-legal responses to deal with the contemporary humanrights issues which is genocide.
First of all , legal responses refer to the UN humanright treaties and Genocide Convention that were adopted in 1948 and approved the Universal Declaration of HumanRight (UDHR) by the United Nation.
The Genocide Convention (1948) outlaws genocide , crime against humanity and crime under international law . All participating countries that ratified the convention will be prevented and punished the genocide in the war or a peace of time.
The Declarations defines the civil and political rights ( including the right to life , the right of liberty, and a fair trial) as well as the economic social and cultural rights( including the right to social security and participating in cultural right in one’s community).
In this case, Cambodia was a party that ratified the Genocide Convention on 14.10.1950. It was enforceable where the Senior Leader of Khmer Rouge between1975 -1979 under the definition of Convention. In contradiction , it was enforceable but it could not desist the massacre that happened in the 1975-1979.
Next , Cambodia was ratified the UDHR and International Convention on Civil and...